Maintenance tribunal has no power to pass eviction order of children: HC

The court was dealing with the plea of an Ambala senior citizen, who had appealed against the order of tribunal and appellate authority passed earlier this year

Chandigarh The Punjab and Haryana high court has held that under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizen Act, 2007, the tribunal as well as appellate authority put in place by respective states, have no power to pass eviction of children from the property of a senior citizen parent.

A plea was filed under the 2007 law, seeking the eviction of a son and daughter-in-law from the house they were residing in, which was dismissed. (HT file photo)

“The only power with the Tribunal and the Appellate Authority is to grant maintenance by taking into consideration the facts of each and every case and also to set aside the transfer of property in case the senior citizen is able to prove that a fraud was played by the children while executing the said transfer of the property,” the high court bench of justice Harsimran Singh Sethi said.

The court was dealing with the plea of an Ambala senior citizen, who had appealed against the order of tribunal and appellate authority passed earlier this year.

The petitioner father was living in a separate house in the same village, where the son and his wife lived. He wanted to shift to that house on the grounds that the present house, which initially belonged to his father, is being occupied by him now and is in a depleted form and needed renovation.

He filed an application under the 2007 law, seeking the eviction of his son and daughter-in-law from the house they were residing in, which was dismissed.

In the high court, he had argued that merely having another accommodation cannot be a ground to deny the benefit to the petitioner regarding eviction of his son and daughter-in-law. He also maintained that the tribunal was bound to pass the order of eviction once the application has been made under the 2007 Act.

The court noted that petitioner and his son’s family are living in separate accommodation. The petitioner is a pensioner and also has agriculture land from where he is earning sufficient to lead a “dignified life”.

“In the whole of the petition, there is not even a single averment that in order to live a dignified life as envisaged under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner needs assistance of his children,” the court noted.

“ A bare perusal of the above (judgments discussed) would show that neither by the Tribunal as envisaged under 2007, Act nor the Appellate Authority on an appeal preferred under Section 16 of the 2007, Act have jurisdiction to pass an order of eviction,” the bench said, upholding the tribunal’s order.